The speeds that they were going, at the altitude that they were, are impossible for those planes to maintain for any period of time without basically breaking up, wings falling off etc. They are only designed to go fast at very high altitudes in much thinner atmosphere. And even then, not that fast. Look into Pilots for 9/11 truth.
Yes that is correct from what I recall. I don't remember where the speeds came from as I don't believe the black boxes were ever recovered from the WTC buildings but I could be wrong on that. The claim is at the specific altitude the planes were flying, they would likely tear apart. The attack on the pentagon is similar, they found the speed and maneuvers the plane was doing were almost impossible for a Boeing 757. The air traffic controllers thought it was a military plane the way it was flying.
please look into pilots for 911 truth, especially if you are a plane enthusiast. They are at odds with the mainstream of AE 9/11 truth. They bring up this about the large passenger plane air speed limitations at low altitude. It's detailed in the manufacturers documentation, the speed beyond which structural failure occurs. The planes were flying well beyond what some of them say is even possible at that altitude (for those large passenger planes). You should read what they have to say. They have even made a couple of documentaries.
This is also mentioned in the documentary "September 11: The New Pearl Harbor". Neither groups speculate the same explanation as I have done above. I believe they tend towards the idea of smaller, radio-controlled military drone aircraft being used.
I remember the flight paths possibility being questioned. Sure, manufacture says it's out of spec. Anyone who knows anything will say you're not supposed to be able to do aileron rolls in a 747, but sky king did it.
The speeds that they were going, at the altitude that they were, are impossible for those planes to maintain for any period of time without basically breaking up, wings falling off etc. They are only designed to go fast at very high altitudes in much thinner atmosphere. And even then, not that fast. Look into Pilots for 9/11 truth.
Yes that is correct from what I recall. I don't remember where the speeds came from as I don't believe the black boxes were ever recovered from the WTC buildings but I could be wrong on that. The claim is at the specific altitude the planes were flying, they would likely tear apart. The attack on the pentagon is similar, they found the speed and maneuvers the plane was doing were almost impossible for a Boeing 757. The air traffic controllers thought it was a military plane the way it was flying.
please look into pilots for 911 truth, especially if you are a plane enthusiast. They are at odds with the mainstream of AE 9/11 truth. They bring up this about the large passenger plane air speed limitations at low altitude. It's detailed in the manufacturers documentation, the speed beyond which structural failure occurs. The planes were flying well beyond what some of them say is even possible at that altitude (for those large passenger planes). You should read what they have to say. They have even made a couple of documentaries.
This is also mentioned in the documentary "September 11: The New Pearl Harbor". Neither groups speculate the same explanation as I have done above. I believe they tend towards the idea of smaller, radio-controlled military drone aircraft being used.
I remember the flight paths possibility being questioned. Sure, manufacture says it's out of spec. Anyone who knows anything will say you're not supposed to be able to do aileron rolls in a 747, but sky king did it.
https://youtu.be/7HUp4yJ60L4
What are you talking about "suspended particles"? What are they? What are they suspended in? How?